Tuesday, March 3, the U.S. Supreme court expanded the ability of States to use criminal laws against illegal immigrants and other persons without permission to work in the United States, writes Reuters.
The 5-4 decision, adopted with the participation of the conservative majority, reversed the decision of the Supreme court of Kansas in 2017, which annulled the conviction of three of the restaurant’s employees for the fraudulent use of social security numbers of other persons.
In the opinion rendered by judge Samuel Alito, the Supreme court found that Kansas did not commit unlawful interference with Federal authority over immigration policy.
Four liberal judges disagreed with the decision. Although the Federal law in 1986 called “the immigration reform and control” does not expressly prohibit States to carry out such prosecutions, the judge said that in the dissenting opinion, written by justice Stephen Breyer, the overall goal of the law reports of the case fraud work permits “only the Federal government.”
The administration of President Donald trump has supported the work of Kansas. Trump has made a strict policy against immigration a Central element of his presidency and campaign for re-election in 2020. Kansas is one of several conservative States that have tried to crack down on illegal immigrants.
The dissenting opinion of Breyer permission prosecutions, like the case of Kansas, “opens a huge loophole” allowing the States to control the Federal work permits.
Although associated with labour immigration fraud is a Federal matter, the government of the state of Kansas claimed that their prosecution were not related to immigration, and did not contradict Federal immigration law. Kansas argued that the decision in favor of immigrants would undermine the ability of the state to deal with the growing problem of identity theft.
Group for the protection of the rights of immigrants said that giving States the right to prosecute fraud in employment will allow them to take immigration policy into their own hands.
Ramiro Garcia, of Donaldo Morales and Guadalupe Ochoa-Lara did not have permits to work in the United States and provided to their employers social security numbers that were not their own.
Social security number is used to identify people for the purposes of employment and taxation. People illegally entering the country are not given social security numbers, which the US government provides all legal residents.
The case was focused on the process of verification of employment under Federal immigration law requiring employers in the special form I-9 to certify that the employee has the right to work. The law also States that the form “may not be used for purposes other than for enforcement of this law.”
Although the Federal government has the sole right to prosecute individuals for providing fraudulent information in the process of verification of employment, form I-9, the state would prosecute three people for using the same false information in various forms used for the withholding from wages.
On March 3 in his ruling, Alito wrote: “the Submission of tax returns is not fundamentally associated with a Federal system of verification of employment”.
Giving States some freedom legal actions against illegal immigrants, the order may also provide California the means to protect its so-called policy of asylum. This policy limits cooperation with Federal immigration authorities to protect some illegal immigrants from deportation.
Administration trump has filed a lawsuit against California and the appeal to the Supreme court after losing in lower court. The administration has also sued other States and localities for policy regarding shelters.